DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> Nikon D70 vs Canon 300D
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 36, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 11/18/2004 06:15:16 PM · #1
Hey there guys just wanted to know your opinion on this subject. I am upgrading to a digital SLR and I think that I have narrowed it down to these two options. I have also looked at the canon 20D and 10D but these are fairly new but I would love to hear more about those 2 as well if anyone cares to share...

:)
Anni
 11/18/2004 06:26:53 PM · #2
Feature wise the D70 is better than the 300D but it is also more expensive by close to $300. The D70 is closer to the 20D although the 20D is faster and has a bigger Pixel count. The D70 sits between the 300D and the 20D. All depends what your current and Future needs are, I'd go with the 20D personally, but if price is an absolute criteria then the 300D is more camera than most beginners would need.
 11/18/2004 06:31:39 PM · #3
I agree with doctornick. If you have narrowed down your choices to 300D and D70, go with D70. Otherwise, do consider the 20D too.
And I have seen price drop in D70 too. Don't have any links, but I have seen really good deals. Also there were some posts here on DPC recently about a price drop on 300D too.
I assume that you have checked prices on both 300D and D70. If they are your options , I would definitely suggest D70.
 11/18/2004 06:38:52 PM · #4
Note : Nikon and Canon have rebates currently in the U.S.

Canon Rebate thread
Nikon Rebate thread

Message edited by author 2004-11-18 18:43:30.
 11/18/2004 06:40:08 PM · #5
Originally posted by doctornick:
Feature wise the D70 is better than the 300D but it is also more expensive by close to $300. The D70 is closer to the 20D although the 20D is faster and has a bigger Pixel count. The D70 sits between the 300D and the 20D. All depends what your current and Future needs are, I'd go with the 20D personally, but if price is an absolute criteria then the 300D is more camera than most beginners would need.


But the D70 is $300 more if you include the 18-70mm AF-S lens. Which is vastly superior to the 300D's kit lens. Fast, quiet focus; razor sharp images. You get a lot of lens for the money. Same thing goes for the 20D, I think.
 11/18/2004 06:46:11 PM · #6
Originally posted by Anni:
Hey there guys just wanted to know your opinion on this subject. I am upgrading to a digital SLR and I think that I have narrowed it down to these two options. I have also looked at the canon 20D and 10D but these are fairly new but I would love to hear more about those 2 as well if anyone cares to share...

:)
Anni


Other thing to look at is type and cost of lens you look to buy in the future. Myself I like the Canon line because they have bodies available now that would met my future needs :-)

Both choices will serve you well I am sure.
 11/18/2004 06:54:18 PM · #7
wow thanks guys! it is between the 70d, 20, and 10d. I do think I will go with the 20D but the 10D is very very tempting. Oh decisions decisions. What lenses would you suggest for natural light portraits?
 11/18/2004 07:00:45 PM · #8
I narrowed my choices down to those 2 in the beginning, too. You can see which one I chose.

The reason? Smoothness (less noise) of the final photo. And the Rebel is more camera than I can ever need. Then there was the price factor. Rebel came out cheaper all around with more accessories at more competitive prices due to it's popularity. Finally, it seemed the Rebel had more lenses in the market at better prices and the Wasia hack helped out too ;)
 11/18/2004 07:21:41 PM · #9
Nikon and Canon both have a 50mm f1.8 (I think) that I love for portraiture. Comes to around a 75mm with the conversion. And they are both reasonably cheap
 11/18/2004 08:18:40 PM · #10
Originally posted by Anni:
wow thanks guys! it is between the 70d, 20, and 10d. I do think I will go with the 20D but the 10D is very very tempting. Oh decisions decisions. What lenses would you suggest for natural light portraits?


Can't beat the Canon 50mm f/1.8 for value! $70 gets you a fast sharp prime, a must in any photographer's arsenal, the f/1.4 is better built and a tad faster but more than 4x the price of the f/1.8
 11/18/2004 08:42:05 PM · #11
20d is a bit more to pay, the good kit lens bumps it up to 2 grand. the 18-55 kit lens makes the 20d 1600. I was debating on this for a long while, convinced i was gonna get the 20d. I got the d70 this week though, 100$ rebate, a lot better than the rebel, kit lens is much better too. another thing that influenced my decision which probably doesn't matter to most people was the fact that nikon makes a 10.5 mm fisheye, the only true fisheye for dSLR's. i love the d70 though after 2 days. too bad ive had to work overtime these past 2 days...grrr.

edit- metering in d70 is lots better too.

Message edited by author 2004-11-18 20:42:28.
 11/18/2004 08:44:27 PM · #12
Oh, yeah, almost forgot. The D70 has a spot meter. Na na na. 8-)

But the 20D is still soooooo sweet.
 11/18/2004 08:52:50 PM · #13
If I had to choose again, I'd get the D70 over the 300D. Simply put, its faster (e.g. start up) and is less "crippled" than the Rebel. Plus it's black....ohhh. Blackness.
 11/18/2004 08:55:15 PM · #14
Originally posted by bledford:
If I had to choose again, I'd get the D70 over the 300D. Simply put, its faster (e.g. start up) and is less "crippled" than the Rebel. Plus it's black....ohhh. Blackness.


They have a black bodied 300d now.
 11/18/2004 08:57:12 PM · #15
Originally posted by skylen:
Oh, yeah, almost forgot. The D70 has a spot meter. Na na na. 8-)

But the 20D is still soooooo sweet.


Oh yeah, almost forgot, the 20d has 5fps. :P

Message edited by author 2004-11-18 20:57:31.
 11/19/2004 05:46:53 AM · #16
Cool Thanks for all your comments. Still not sure though, Oh decisions decisions!!
 11/19/2004 05:56:19 AM · #17
If in doubt - go for the prettiest looking camera
 11/19/2004 06:28:42 AM · #18
Or you can hang out for the brand-spanking new just-released-today in Japan Konica Minolta alpha-7, which is the world's first digital camera with an in-body anti-shake system. Alpha-7 but it's in Japanese. You can click on 360 for an all-round view of it. Of course, they're very coy about the price ... have to check the retailers.
 11/19/2004 06:45:52 AM · #19
Originally posted by Pug-H:
Or you can hang out for the brand-spanking new just-released-today in Japan Konica Minolta alpha-7, which is the world's first digital camera with an in-body anti-shake system. Alpha-7 but it's in Japanese. You can click on 360 for an all-round view of it. Of course, they're very coy about the price ... have to check the retailers.


It has different names over the world, but I will be getting this camera very soon. I tried it in my local camera store yesterday, and I way prefer it to the Canon and Nikon competition. What is people's reasoning in this thread for ignoring this superb camera?
 11/19/2004 07:29:05 AM · #20
I have just come back from a holiday, in the hotel we stayed at they had 4 photographers all using D70's. These guys are taking upto 1000 photos per day with the D70's and think they are brilliant. No problems at all. They seem very robust. I was suprised at how light they feel in your hands and off course they are a very nice kick ass black! As one of them put it to me looking at my poor 'Old' silver bodied 300d quote and the D70's are for professional use... unquote!!

I am more than happy with my 300D and once I got to grips with it am producing images that I am more than pleased with.

Question - would I buy a D70 over a 300D now

Answer - If I was starting out from scratch with no lenses etc then Yes, I would. However if you have invested in decent Canon glass then the decision would likely be No.

Message edited by author 2004-11-19 07:30:01.
 11/19/2004 08:44:08 AM · #21
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I tried it in my local camera store yesterday, and I way prefer it to the Canon and Nikon competition. What is people's reasoning in this thread for ignoring this superb camera?

Well, since you asked... the preliminary reviews I've read list a number of serious issues that would prevent me from even considering this camera:

1) 6MP; the 20D is 8MP and offers the same image quality, along with an ISO 3200 option

2) Canon's IS lenses function better than the built-in "anti-shake" feature, and can be set to operate in a single-axis mode when doing panning work. (Think about this: in Canon IS lenses, the motion sensors are located in the lens, which moves significantly more than the body, making detection of even slight movement faster and more accurate. Take a pencil and hold the writing end in your hand. Look at it sideways and barely try to tilt it up and down. Notice how much more the eraser-end moves compared to the writing end in your hand...)

3) Konica-Minolta's anti-shake technology is not visibile in the viewfinder, making it basically "guesswork" to know what effect AS is having. With Canon IS lenses, as soon as I depress the focus button, the viewfinder fluidly stabilizes, as if by magic. It has to be experienced on a long lens to be truly appreciated.

4) The focus motor is built in to the camera instead of the lenses. That means there is a noisy, slow, mechanical linkage between the camera and the lens. The Canon EF mount is completely electronic. And many of their lenses utilize USM (Ultrasonic Motors) for focusing, a technology which is nearly inaudible and incredibly fast.

5) The manual focus ring rotates during auto-focus because of the mechanical linkage to the focus motor in the camera. So how you balance the lens with your left hand becomes an issue. Canon's USM lenses do not move the focus ring during AF, yet they are always full-time manual ready... just grab the focus ring and twist. On the 7D, if you want to switch to manual focus, you have to push and hold a special "Manual Focus" button on the back of the camera.

6) Poor battery life. Only 400 shots per charge is way too few -- and that is with brand-new batteries. As batteries age, the number of shots you get per charge will become even lower.

7) No top-panel LCD display to show your critical camera settings (aperture, shutter speed, shots remaining, ISO, etc.) You have to activate the display on the back (further contributing to excess battery usage and slowing you down if you need to double-check your settings before a shot).

8) Slow turn-on time.

9) Slow buffering / CF write performance ("the Maxxum 7D needs to wait a full 10 seconds or so until space in the buffer has been cleared for the next shot. A single frame takes about 12 seconds to write to the card on the Maxxum 7D, while the 20D takes less than 2 seconds to write a frame to the same card.") And remember, the 20D is writing out more data because it is an 8MP camera!

10) Very slow cross-sync speed (1/125sec when Anti-Shake is turned on, and just 1/160 sec when it's turned off)

11) Sluggish performance ("I found that the Maxxum 7D was not as responsive as I would have liked. I have no hard figures to back this up, but the camera always seemed to be about 1/8th of a second behind what I wanted it to be doing. Usually with a new camera I find after a few hundred frames that I become familiar with the amount of "lag" between when my brain tells my finger to press the shutter release, and when it actually happens. I never could quite get the measure of the Maxxum 7D."). One of the primary reasons to move to a DSLR is responsiveness.

12) Softer images out-of-camera compared to the 20D (requiring more post-processing)

That's quite a "laundry list" of issues IMHO. I didn't even cover some of the other performance issues like 5 frames/second instead of 3, etc. Perhaps you can "justify" them away and make yourself feel "good" about buying into that "superb camera", and that's great. I just don't see it as serious competition to Canon or Nikon.

Message edited by author 2004-11-19 08:59:43.
 11/19/2004 08:55:49 AM · #22
Originally posted by EddyG:
Well, since you asked... I just don't see it as serious competition to Canon or Nikon.


That's useful information. I just added it in because there was a full-page advertisement in the paper this morning announcing it's on sale from today.
 11/19/2004 11:23:20 AM · #23
Originally posted by EddyG:
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
I tried it in my local camera store yesterday, and I way prefer it to the Canon and Nikon competition. What is people's reasoning in this thread for ignoring this superb camera?

Well, since you asked... the preliminary reviews I've read list a number of serious issues that would prevent me from even considering this camera:

1) 6MP; the 20D is 8MP and offers the same image quality, along with an ISO 3200 option

2) Canon's IS lenses function better than the built-in "anti-shake" feature, and can be set to operate in a single-axis mode when doing panning work. (Think about this: in Canon IS lenses, the motion sensors are located in the lens, which moves significantly more than the body, making detection of even slight movement faster and more accurate. Take a pencil and hold the writing end in your hand. Look at it sideways and barely try to tilt it up and down. Notice how much more the eraser-end moves compared to the writing end in your hand...)

3) Konica-Minolta's anti-shake technology is not visibile in the viewfinder, making it basically "guesswork" to know what effect AS is having. With Canon IS lenses, as soon as I depress the focus button, the viewfinder fluidly stabilizes, as if by magic. It has to be experienced on a long lens to be truly appreciated.

4) The focus motor is built in to the camera instead of the lenses. That means there is a noisy, slow, mechanical linkage between the camera and the lens. The Canon EF mount is completely electronic. And many of their lenses utilize USM (Ultrasonic Motors) for focusing, a technology which is nearly inaudible and incredibly fast.

5) The manual focus ring rotates during auto-focus because of the mechanical linkage to the focus motor in the camera. So how you balance the lens with your left hand becomes an issue. Canon's USM lenses do not move the focus ring during AF, yet they are always full-time manual ready... just grab the focus ring and twist. On the 7D, if you want to switch to manual focus, you have to push and hold a special "Manual Focus" button on the back of the camera.

6) Poor battery life. Only 400 shots per charge is way too few -- and that is with brand-new batteries. As batteries age, the number of shots you get per charge will become even lower.

7) No top-panel LCD display to show your critical camera settings (aperture, shutter speed, shots remaining, ISO, etc.) You have to activate the display on the back (further contributing to excess battery usage and slowing you down if you need to double-check your settings before a shot).

8) Slow turn-on time.

9) Slow buffering / CF write performance ("the Maxxum 7D needs to wait a full 10 seconds or so until space in the buffer has been cleared for the next shot. A single frame takes about 12 seconds to write to the card on the Maxxum 7D, while the 20D takes less than 2 seconds to write a frame to the same card.") And remember, the 20D is writing out more data because it is an 8MP camera!

10) Very slow cross-sync speed (1/125sec when Anti-Shake is turned on, and just 1/160 sec when it's turned off)

11) Sluggish performance ("I found that the Maxxum 7D was not as responsive as I would have liked. I have no hard figures to back this up, but the camera always seemed to be about 1/8th of a second behind what I wanted it to be doing. Usually with a new camera I find after a few hundred frames that I become familiar with the amount of "lag" between when my brain tells my finger to press the shutter release, and when it actually happens. I never could quite get the measure of the Maxxum 7D."). One of the primary reasons to move to a DSLR is responsiveness.

12) Softer images out-of-camera compared to the 20D (requiring more post-processing)

That's quite a "laundry list" of issues IMHO. I didn't even cover some of the other performance issues like 5 frames/second instead of 3, etc. Perhaps you can "justify" them away and make yourself feel "good" about buying into that "superb camera", and that's great. I just don't see it as serious competition to Canon or Nikon.


You've obviously read the same review as me... but you've been a bit selective because he then goes on to review the good points and concludes that it IS serious competition to the Canon and Nikon. Anyway, I'll post more on this when I'm out of work.
 11/19/2004 11:33:03 AM · #24
The Minolta is also more expensive than the 20D...
 11/19/2004 11:33:31 AM · #25
Originally posted by petrakka:
20d is a bit more to pay, the good kit lens bumps it up to 2 grand. the 18-55 kit lens makes the 20d 1600. I was debating on this for a long while, convinced i was gonna get the 20d. I got the d70 this week though, 100$ rebate, a lot better than the rebel, kit lens is much better too. another thing that influenced my decision which probably doesn't matter to most people was the fact that nikon makes a 10.5 mm fisheye, the only true fisheye for dSLR's. i love the d70 though after 2 days. too bad ive had to work overtime these past 2 days...grrr.

edit- metering in d70 is lots better too.


Welcome to the d70 club. Now, please change your default camera in your profile :-).
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 09:08:50 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/24/2024 09:08:50 PM EDT.